A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

"2017 Highest 1435"

1. On December 9, 201, the Defendant committed the crime against the Victim C in the name and incomprehion of the Suwon District Court located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, which was located in Suwon-si, for the victim C. The Defendant would allow the victim C to perform construction works on the face of lending KRW 50 million as the remainder to purchase the land is insufficient. The Defendant would pay the borrowed money on January 9, 2012.

“The phrase “ was false.”

However, in fact, the Defendant was unable to perform the said construction because it did not provide funds for the remaining amount of KRW 125 million out of total of KRW 690 million of the purchase price of the D land in the Chungcheongbuk-gun. Even if the Defendant received money from the injured party, he did not think that it would be used for the cost of living, such as card payments, insurance premiums and public charges, and did not have any intent or ability to actually perform the construction work for the injured party or to repay the money on the date of the promise.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as such, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 3 million from the victim, to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of E on December 6, 2011, and KRW 47 million from the same account on December 9, 201.

2. On January 16, 2014, the Defendant attempted to build a multi-household house with the victim F at the H design office located in Suwon-si G in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Seoul-si.

As the design cost and civil construction cost are required within the building owner, the construction will be entrusted with the loan of money.

“The phrase “ was false.”

However, the fact was that the defendant did not pay the down payment after the conclusion of the sales contract for the above real estate, and the contract was de facto reversed, and there was no intention or ability to allow the defendant to execute the construction as agreed even if he borrowed money from the victim due to the lack of the fact that the construction permit related to the above multi-household

Nevertheless, the defendant deceivings the victim as such and belongs to it on January 2014.